norbold

An impossible task, Sidney. Mine changes from day-to-day! Here's today's list (in no order) - FUNDIN - MAUGER - RICKARDSSON - FARNDON - BRIGGS - HUXLEY - NIELSEN - DUGGAN - WILKINSON - YOUNG. Come back tomorrow for a new list!!!!

Very sorry to hear this. Always figures in anyone's list of the all-time greats and probably could have won even more individual titles if he hadn't been such a committed team rider. Probably, in that respect, he actually was the greatest ever.

Let's face it, none of the riders in the final yesterday are likely to trouble the likes of Tai, Magic, Emil, Freddie or Bartosz very much next year, which is why they are in the qualifiers and not the GP. So we are really only looking for riders who might just make the top eight and all of those who qualified might just make that. But they have all qualified properly and the only way to overcome the "problem" would be to do away with the qualifiers altogether, which I guess not many here would agree with as we would then have to rely on picks, and who would be picked in their place? Again I can't see many riders outside the top 8 likely to challenge the top 5 or 6 at the moment. The alternative really is to encourage younger riders in order to give them the experience. Maybe bring back the automatic qualification for the Under 21 Champion? And/or reserve a couple of places for under 25s?

I think you completely missed Walter's little in-joke there. It wasn't aimed at you!

Indeed. But the point I was making was that the OFFICIAL record will always show Robert to blame.

Poor decision yet again by the ref. Of course, the important thing is that Jason Doyle is ok, or at least not too seriously hurt, but the problem is that by making that decision it means that Robert Lambert is now held officially to blame for whatever happens to Doyle, when, quite clearly, he wasn't.

Isn't it about time Nige and Kelv understood how the scoring works?

I'd say that was only true for a v ery limited period. His best years were really before and just at the start of the Big Five's dominance, from 1953-1954, when he was, indeed, one of the world's best riders along with Ronnie Moore and Jack Young and maybe just into the early days of Fundin, Craven and Briggo, 1955-1956. After that the Big Four of Moore, Craven, Fundin and Briggs began to dominate and Crutcher was left a little behind. Still a great rider but not quite in their league any more.

I left school in 1965 and went on to Teacher Training College. I had to make my choice in 1964, so for my first choice I chose Keswick Hall, which is about three miles south of Norwich. I was fortunate enough to win my place there. I chose it specifically so I could go to Norwich speedway. Of course, they closed at the end of 1964, between my successful application and going there!

Interesting to hear that the Aces are leading Belle Vue!

England won 76-47, scored under the 4-2-1 system. England: Ginger Lees 20, Eric Langton 16, Syd Jackson 15, Tiger Stevenson 13, Jack Parker 7, Wal Phillips 4, Tom Farndon 1, Claude Rye 0. Australia: Vic Huxley 12, Dick Case 8, Ron Johnson 8, Bluey Wilkinson 8, Lionel Van Praag 5, Ernie Evans 3, Jack Sharp 3, Max Grosskreutz 0.

Once a Jolly Swagman is on Talking Pictures (Sky 328) tomorrow (30 June) at 6:00 p.m.

It's a shame Len Read never made it to a final. Now over 100 and still quite sprightly...

I've still got all my Speedway Stars going back to 1960! But, I feel I have better things to do with my time than trawl through nearly 60 years worth just to catch Philip out!!!! Maybe writing another speedway book on "Good Tactics in the Speedway of Nations tournament".

Just as well you couldn't be bothered any more and didn't want the last word.

??????

It's not hindsight, everyone knew the rules beforehand.

And, in the context of the final, what's the difference between a 2-4 and a 3-3, where your three points come from a win?

I am very sorry to hear the news. When I wrote my history of Rye House, I spoke to many people involved with the club from promoters and managers to riders and fans. All of them had nothing but praise for Kelvin. He was an absolute hero to many and was undoubtedly Mr Rye House to them. This is a passage from my book that summed up his contribution to Rye House: "On 16 September [1990], in the home match against Glasgow, Mullarkey fell and never again returned to the track. It was a sad end for the Rockets’ most loyal servant. Nevertheless his fifteen year career as a Rye House rider had been a wonderful example to other riders. His exuberant never-say-die attitude had been an outstanding feature of the team for ten years. He had been a heat leader for seven years, captain of the team that won the cup in 1979 and the league in 1980 and was responsible for holding the team together in the potentially disastrous 1981 season. His commitment to the team was second to none as his massive tally of bonus points in 1979 and 1980 in particular showed. From September 1975 until he left for Canterbury on loan at the start of the 1983 season, he did not miss a single match for Rye House, racking up a total of 295 consecutive league appearances. In 1989, at the age of 38, he made himself available to answer the call of the club when they were in desperate trouble and did the same again in 1990. There is no doubt that Mullarkey has written himself in to the Rye House record books as the most popular rider ever to wear the Rockets’ colours." Because of this I featured him on the front cover of the book and everyone I spoke to afterwards agreed he was definitely the right choice for the cover. R.I.P. Kelvin and sincere condolences to family and friends.

I asked Ove and his mechanic, Les Mullins, about this story once. They said that it was a good story and laughed!

And if Emil had passed Tai, GB would have lost.....oh, we did anyway. So what difference would that have made?

Well that makes all the difference.

It's not Its.

I have always been a great admirer of Tai's on-track exploits and there is no doubt there is a strong case to say he is Britain's best-ever. Certainly in the top 4. And the way he rode during the SON certainly emphasises that and furthers his cause in that respect no end. So, like a lot of posters on here who have commented on the final race, I have no dislike of Tai nor any need to "attack" him. And I find it speaks volumes for the paucity of the argument of others when they have to resort to that line of reasoning when trying to answer the criticism that he should have done more to help Lambert in the final. It would be much better to give some sort of reasoned argument why they feel his tactics in the last race were correct rather than attacking everyone as "Tai haters". To his credit, Philip has tried to do just that without ad hominem attacks, but, in my opinion, has failed miserably to make out any case at all why Tai should have just gone for the win and forget his partner. Yes, we know the chances of his shepherding Rob through past the world class Sayfutdinov were close to zero, but there was no alternative, given the rules. What difference did it make to the overall position that Tai storms off to win? There was only one chance of victory last night and that was for Rob not to come last. Other than last himself, it was irrelevant where Tai finished up. He could have stormed off and won in a new track record for all the difference it made. The only tactic he had was to hang back and try and help, however difficult that was. Can someone please give a good reason why they think Tai was right to do what he did without dismissing people who disagree as "Tai haters"?

So your tactics would have been not to even try?